The problem with the first is that the appropriate level is one at a much lower population.

I do agree that the use of higher technology carries with it the (implicit) demand for MORE resources from some source. Are we willing to destroy the environment of, say, the asteroids, in order to keep Earth relatively clean?

At one point, they shipped dirty laundry from San Francisco to Hawaii to be washed. It made economic sense, but not energy sense. In the future, we may put industry into space. That makes energy sense, but will it make economic? A question worth debating.